Nebraska data appears to be sparse

[dturnbull]

There are only 3 companies showing up as giving money in Nebraska in the latest data. That doesn't seem right, especially given activity around Keystone XL -- you'd expect TransCanada or associated companies to be in there.

[michalgm]

I noticed this before, and unfortunately this is how it is in the
underlying data. Hmmm...I know I wrote up some sort of report about
this, but can't find it anywhere. Anyway, you can see the problem is
even on nimsp's website:
http://www.followthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/contributor_details.phtml?s=NE&y=2010&i=33&f=S

My guess is that either Nebraska has either very lax reporting
requirements or (less likely) very strict contribution regulations. We
can ask NIMSP about it, though it doubt it is likely to change anytime
soon. We may just want to take nebraska off the list.

I'll let you know if I find my analysis.

--greg

On 09/10/2013 03:26 PM, dturnbull wrote:

There are only 3 companies showing up as giving money in Nebraska in the
latest data. That doesn't seem right, especially given activity around
Keystone XL -- you'd expect TransCanada or associated companies to be in
there.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#69.

[stanleyjones]

We decided yesterday to go ahead and pull NE and ND. That solution closes this issue.

[michalgm]

Shouldn't I change the code before we close the bug? :)

On 09/26/2013 11:04 AM, Stanley Jones wrote:

We decided yesterday to go ahead and pull NE and ND. That solution
closes this issue.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#69 (comment).

[stanleyjones]

Ha, sure. I was thinking that the issue was that the data was sparse and the decision to hide it "fixed" that problem. But by all means, go ahead and close it via code. :)

[michalgm]

OK - no more NE and ND